The Digital Suicide of Digital Homicide
By n9462716
Social Media can often be a double-edged sword. It has incredible potential to be used to market a product or service, to build a community and a loyal fanbase that can be directly interacted on a personal level that was simply not possible two decades ago. Followers on social media can then be turned into consumers and even be convinced to invite their friends. On the other hand, companies are often under far more scrutiny and even a poorly worded tweet can have disastrous effects on their reputation.
This case study will be focusing on a blunder made by Digital Homicide. For those not familiar, Digital Homicide is an Indie Video Game Developer/Publisher (also previously known as Imminent Uprising), and once had many released games on Steam, a popular PC game distribution platform. When popular youtuber, Jim Sterling, uploaded a video criticising their game, The Slaughtering Grounds, Digital Homicide were none too pleased and decided to strike back. In his video, Sterling criticised the quality of the game, claiming it had poorly implemented mechanics, confusing controls, and a lack of coherent art direction, whilst gameplay footage provided evidence for his points. He expressed his outrage that a game could be sold in such a state, and called it a ‘total failure’ (Sterling, 2014). Digital Homicide followed up this with a review of his ‘review’, which was simply Sterling’s video, but with text overlayed on top of it, written in the first person pretending to speak as him, and making many disparaging comments and even insulting his person, calling him a “f*cking idiot”, and blaming him for not playing the game correctly. The developer also changed the name of their steam account to “JimFnSterlingSon”. Sterling responded by reviewing their review of his video, and going through and addressing the comments they made (Sterling, 2014). Digital Homicide followed that up by reuploading Sterling’s review of their review of his ‘review’, this time just as text with the audio of his voice, and this time claimed that Sterling and other reviewers are leeches, and contribute nothing to the community. Both of Digital Homicide’s videos have since been deleted, but the second has been reuploaded by Sterling on his youtube (Digital Homicide, 2014).
Fig1. The video that started it all (Sterling, 2014)
Eventually Digital Homicide decided to simply issue a DMCA takedown notice on Sterling’s original video, to have it removed from youtube. They defended the move in a Steam post that has now been deleted, but has been archived here (Mannion, 2014). Sterling managed to get his video reinstated after two weeks.
The back-and-forth continued for some time, until eventually Digital Homicide filed a civil lawsuit against Sterling, claiming ten counts of libel (Cosimano, 2016). From here the story becomes even more convoluted, as they also attempted to sue 100 anonymous steam users for leaving negative comments on their games and forums, and threatened Valve, the creators of Steam, after they removed Digital Homicide and all their games from their platform in response (Good, 2016).
Fig2. This video by Sterling explains all the events that led up to and including the lawsuit against him (Sterling, 2017)
Now while this is all horrible, today we’re just going to focus on their earlier transgressions, and outline where they really went wrong. Video games, like any other works of art, are often subjected to harsh critique. Sterling’s was only a 10 minute, first impressions video and no true critique, as he stated multiple times, yet Digital Homicide still claimed his ‘review’ was an unfair attack. There have been many cases where other developers have been called out for releasing games that have been flawed, and in some cases in a broken state, and when those problems aren’t legitimately addressed, developers generally have more sense than to defend and argue for them. In the case of Mass Effect Andromeda which released with numerous bugs and animation glitches, Bioware released a blogpost outlining how they would fix the game and what changes players could expect in the future (Flynn, 2017). Digital Homicide decided instead to lash out at the offending party, throwing childish insults and sarcastic comments. Not only that but they did so very publicly, changing their public steam name to mock Sterling and admitting on that page that they were behind the original response video.
Fig3. Bioware’s response after they received for Mass Effect Andromeda (Flynn, 2017)
Crisis Management is a very important concept that many fledgling companies seem to struggle with, but Digital Homicide failed spectacularly at this. When dealing with a crisis or aggressive users (which it is important to note, was not quite the case here), the basic steps that should be followed are: Acknowledge the problem; Respond to concerns in a way that is transparent and specific; Apologise and never argue back; avoid referral to offline channels; Outline any steps that will be taken in the future, and create a crisis FAQ (Cassidy, 2017).
Digital Homicide failed each of these. Never once did they acknowledge the problem, insisting that Sterling was at fault. They responded to concerns, but did so in a way to further the conflict and not settle it. They refused to apologise, and indeed demanded they be apologised to in court should they win the lawsuit. And as they never truly intended to ‘manage’ this crisis, they never reached the final two steps. Worse still was their insistence on pushing their view. By showing the community that they were steadfast in their stance, and refusing to back down, accept their mistake, and take responsibility for their game or their actions afterwards, they completely botched the first three steps of crisis management, and cemented themselves in pop-culture. Countless popular youtubers all covered the topic, especially as the lawsuit broke out, seeing it as a case that could potentially change the entire YouTube landscape for better or worse depending on the outcome. Eventually it was discovered by some that the game used copyrighted assets in the logo, and that the blood textures that covered the screen in game to signify low health, were ripped straight from Google Images and poorly edited to remove the white background (Jones, 2014).
Fig4. The image from Google Images (left) and the blood textures from in game (right)
This built up distrust and dislike within the community, and turned many against Digital Homicide when before they would simply not have cared, and drew much negative attention towards them. By stepping into the public sphere and creating this less than savoury image for themselves, and allowing the virality of a ‘Developer gone mad’ to take hold of the community, Digital Homicide did far more damage to themselves than Sterling ever did.
But let’s quickly talk why the brothers at Digital Homicide may have acted the way they did. It's entirely possible the company being family run might have had something to do with their reaction. Both brothers attacked Sterling personally, and seemed to take any criticisms personally in turn. Presence Bleed is a concept that affects many workers, and is due to a blurring between a person’s personal and professional life, resulting in them being unable to separate the two, and sometimes becoming overly attached to aspects of their professional life in a personal way. Melissa Gregg stats that Presence Bleed occurs when “firm boundaries between personal and professional identities no longer apply” (Gregg, 2013). Maintaining a strict work/life balance is integral to maintaining a functioning professional career, and both brothers in this case seemed to fail to follow such a balance, thus potentially resulting in their professional life bleeding into their private life, and causing them to view their game through rose-tinted glasses.
Fig5. The Romine Brother’s very clearly became very attached to their work
Now let’s consider how Digital Homicide should have approached this situation. Some might argue that simply remaining silent would have been the better solution, and indeed compared to the actions they had taken, it would be. But coming infront of the situation would give them the ability to turn negative publicity into positive publicity. By following the rules of Crisis Management as detailed by Cassidy, the first step would be for acknowledge the problem and respond transparently with specifics. A blog post, a post on the steam forums, or even a youtube video would work well for this. A blog post would be easier to get through and share, but a video could show increased dedication, especially if you unveil the person working behind the games. The post would be apologetic in nature, would address and acknowledge the problem, and would outline steps that would be taken to rectify some, if not all, key issues. By being honest and upfront in this manner, the public perception would be changed from a company that makes bad games, to a company that cares about its products and its consumers, which could greatly impact future sales and reception. Of course this would have to be followed by legitimate efforts to fix the game and make it better, which Digital Homicide seemed unwilling to do, but without it, any words would eventually fall on deaf ears as consumers realised that they just words, with no action behind them.
This has been a deep insight into Digital Homicide, but it’s clear that the entire situation was made far worse than it had to be, due to blunders made by the studio in how they tackled criticism, and their unwillingness to see things differently. Had they approached the criticism openly and addressed their problems, the result might have been far different for them.
References
Sterling, J. (2014). SLAUGHTERING GROUNDS - New 'Worst Game Of 2014' Contender. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfI7pAaOH9c
Sterling, J. (2014). SLAUGHTERING GROUNDS DEVELOPER MELTDOWN INCEPTION SPECIAL. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT0GSPxf0vw
Digital Homicide. (2014). Digital Homicide's second response to Jim Sterling. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXcPiy9g4UQ
Mannion, G. (2014). Game developer issues take down notice against Jim Sterling. Critical Hit. Retrieved 29 May 2017, from http://www.criticalhit.net/gaming/game-developer-issues-take-down-notice-against-jim-sterling/
Cosimano, M. (2016). Indie developer Digital Homicide sues Jim Sterling. Destructoid. Retrieved 28 May 2017, from https://www.destructoid.com/indie-developer-digital-homicide-sues-jim-sterling-349283.phtml
Good, O. (2016). Steam removes games of developer seeking subpoena for users' information (Correction). Polygon. Retrieved 28 May 2017, from https://www.polygon.com/2016/9/17/12951756/digital-homicide-lawsuit-jim-sterling-steam-users-valve
Sterling, J. (2017). When Jim Sterling Was Sued For $10 Million By Digital Homicide (The Jimquisition). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS-LXvhy1Do
Cassidy, E. (2017). KCB206 Social Media, Self and Society: Lecture 8 [Slides]. Retrieved from https://blackboard.qut.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_133419_1&content_id=_6696662_1
Jones, B. (2014). You Might Want to Avoid ‘The Slaughtering Grounds’ Mess. Game Rant. Retrieved 30 May 2017, from https://gamerant.com/the-slaughtering-grounds-jim-sterling/
















